Hi,Just a question from a new rider. I was given an older road bike today that runs very smoothly and I really like it. My question is it has 27" x 1 1/4" tyres on it. Are these easy to get ? What sort of tubes can you use on it and how hard are these to get?Thanks in advance.

Tyres are not hard to get, but options are limited. Tubes are quite common as well, but if your LBS doesn't have them, then 700x28-32 will fit quite well, you'll just need to stretch them very slightly to tuck in, as 27" rims are a little bit bigger. Also make sure you use the correct valves for the rim. Schraeder (the type used in car tyres) have a thicker shaft than Presta valves, so obviously need a bigger hole. Fitting Presta valves into rims drilled for Schraeder isn't a brilliant idea, because the valves can blow out of the tube....

Both tyres and tubes are very easy to get and there are plenty of options. You can go generic 'speed tread' or 'block tread' from a few brands such as Duro and Innova, or you can throw money at it getting things like Panaracer, Schwalbe or Continental. I wouldn't worry with the more expensive tyres, the cheap ones can be had for $10-15 a pop, they grip well, roll well, never puncture and you can expect at least 1,500km out of them.

Re using presta valves in Schrader rims, adapters are available to make that a safe option.

27 x 1-1/4 is IMO a great wheel size, better than 700C.

When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.

Ok so that wording was definitely chosen for 'dramatic effect' but I do firmly believe 27" is the correct size for most road bikes. I see the current move away from 23mm and smaller tyres to 25 and 28mm as recognition of that. My number one issue is punctures, at one stage I was getting so many punctures on my modern road bike with 700C tyres (of various makes and models) that I almost gave cycling away. Now I've got on to Maxxis Refuse tyres things are a lot better, but they cost between $20-45 depending on where you're shopping. 'Standard' 27" tyres on the other hand can be had for as little as $10 and the only puncture I've had with one so far was when I ran over a broken glass bottle on nearly bald tyres.

The problem is that 700C tyres just don't have enough rubber to them, you can add all the snake oil/Kevlar/unobtainium you want (giving the manufacturers an excuse to massively inflate the price) but bigger is still better.

Sure you can use larger 700C sizes like 28mm or up (if you're lucky enough to have a bike that will fit them) but I've done several thousand k on 700x28s and while they matched the 27s for wear and lack of punctures, I feel they didn't roll as well. The difference between 622 rims and 630 mightn't be as big as between 26" and 29" MTB tyres but I certainly can't see it being a hindrance.

Add to that the fact you can get 1", 1-1/4", 1-3/8", or even knobblies for cyclocross, the only reason not to be on 27" is the lack of modern frames. I'm sure that will change before too long.

When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.

I can attest to the quality/economy of standard-issue 27" tyres, but try as might (and I have) I can't perceive any difference, one way or the other, in roll. In any event, you'd have to have the same type of tyre with the same amount of wear with as close as possible to identical wheels on the same frame with the same components and ride in the same conditions following the same route etc etc etc...

I'd be shocked and extremely disappointed in you, ldrcycles, if you're posting your findings without having conducted your tests under such rigorous conditions.

But anyway, what's your opinion on those 28" "Chinese" wheels? Might they roll better? And if they do, wouldn't skinny tyres on 29" wheels roll even better?

TTar wrote:I can attest to the quality/economy of standard-issue 27" tyres, but try as might (and I have) I can't perceive any difference, one way or the other, in roll. In any event, you'd have to have the same type of tyre with the same amount of wear with as close as possible to identical wheels on the same frame with the same components and ride in the same conditions following the same route etc etc etc...

I'd be shocked and extremely disappointed in you, ldrcycles, if you're posting your findings without having conducted your tests under such rigorous conditions.

But anyway, what's your opinion on those 28" "Chinese" wheels? Might they roll better? And if they do, wouldn't skinny tyres on 29" wheels roll even better?

Well that's why I've reserved my comments to what I have ridden on, not having ridden 28" wheels (either the 635 or 642mm, there are 2 different 28" sizes) yet (around a car park on my 54 Healing doesn't count) I can't comment on them.

And you do realise so called 29" wheels are actually just 700C diameter just a wider rim?

When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.

The traditional 27x11/4 tyre is actually closer to a 700c running a 35mm tyre.

I think 27" is an ideal size for a bike that's expecting to see some dirt or gravel roads. Which is why they stayed such a popular size for so long. Bikes equipped with that size could pretty much go anywhere.

ldrcycles wrote:And you do realise so called 29" wheels are actually just 700C diameter just a wider rim?

WHAT!!!??? When did that happen!?

How can a 700C wheel be just a little itty bit smaller than a 27" wheel, but the same size as a 29" wheel? I'm no mathematical genius, but I'm quite certain 29" is 2" bigger than 27"! Next you'll be telling me 28" is Chinese for 26".

SydneyFC2010, your bike probably isn't a 27" at all and I bet you're actually "WesternSydneyWanderes2013".

I get 27" white wall tyres off Ebay. On my second set, probably done about 2000km with these ones and still going strong. Not many punctures.

Only thing i dont like is they are difficult to get on the rim. You need to use Levers (preferably steel ones as plastic ones break, you need some serious force to pop them in)... as a result I've punctured tubes with the levers.

I think i'm on only my second set of tubes too (also from ebay)... the tubes last a good couple of years before the valve blows out.

ldrcycles wrote:And you do realise so called 29" wheels are actually just 700C diameter just a wider rim?

WHAT!!!??? When did that happen!?

How can a 700C wheel be just a little itty bit smaller than a 27" wheel, but the same size as a 29" wheel? I'm no mathematical genius, but I'm quite certain 29" is 2" bigger than 27"! Next you'll be telling me 28" is Chinese for 26".

SydneyFC2010, your bike probably isn't a 27" at all and I bet you're actually "WesternSydneyWanderes2013".

singlespeedscott, please, no! You're just making things worse.

Ahh welcome to the wonderful world of bicycle tyre sizing . The problem is that in the olden days no one thought of using different sized tyres on one rim, so if you wanted a wider tyre, you used a bigger rim. Add the fact that different countries/manufacturers used different sizing designations and you have a recipe for disaster.

According to Wikipedia the 'average' 29er tyre (whatever that is) has an outside diameter of 29.15", where a "typical" 26" tyre has an OD of 26".Of course the problem there is that if you use a fatter or narrower tyre, that dimension will be different. I'm not sure but I imagine it would be possible to mount a narrow slick tyre on a "29er" and have a smaller diameter than a big 26" downhill tyre.

The way to avoid that is to use the rim diameter. So 26" (the MTB 26" we're talking, not one of the FOUR other, non-interchangeable 26" sizes) is 559mm, 700C and "29er" is 622mm, 27" is 630mm, 28 x 1-1/2 (commonly used on chinese and indian roadsters, also called 700B) is 635mm and 28 x 1-3/8 (used on old Australian bikes) is 642mm.

Oh and 650B or "27 x 1-1/2 inch" is actually a 584mm rim.

See it all makes sense now doesn't it .

When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.

I considered asking for just such a sizing explanation, but thought better of it; worried that half the readership here would be rendered senseless and the other half infuriated. While your explanation will probably adversely affect a majority, it probably won't be a huge majority and you can't ask for better than that. Good job.

There is one other question that I very nervously ask; where on earth does the "700" designation come from? What could it possibly refer to? Have those who created these naming conventions been imprisoned yet?

Beware cheap 27" tyres. I ordered a set from the lbs. They looked cheap and cheerful but turned out just cheap. Tread is holding up fine but the gum walls are cracking to the point of retirement after a few months on a bike stored indoors. Mine were made in india. Will cough up for something bdtter this time.

The experiences I have read here are the opposite of mine. I remember 27x. 1 1/4 tyres being absolute rubbish back in the eighties. Puncture prone but stiff as a board and gripless. That was one of the things that has impressed me on modern bikes. The improved ride, grip and durability of 700c tyres. That and the convenience of sti shifters.

I am currently running 17 x 1 1/4 Vee Guard tires at 85 psi on my 1972 roadie. They are basically slicks with water channels on each side of centre. I bought them locally for around $30 each and are without doubt the lowest rolling resistance tires I have used but I haven't tried many and didn't go out of my way to find the best. I used to think the bike quite draggy until I put these tires on and found it out rolled quite a few of the modern roadies encountered in the B2B this year. Mind you, that was well down near the back of the pack so obviously not the best roadies. Surprised a few people I think especially one guy I caught up 100 m then passed going down the Newbridge hill.

Suitable tubes can be bought at the supermarket. I use Thorn resistant ones which mostly seem to do the trick on the cat eyes around Bathurst but pack a standard tube & CO2 in my saddle bag but haven't had a puncture on this set up in 2 years (100K per week). The tires themselves will not resist these thorns at all and you'd be asking for trouble running standard tubes by default.

I really only cycle for exercise and have only done the B2B this 1 time so no racing experience at all. I don't know how these tires go in the wet as I try to avoid that and am pretty careful to not push my luck on the odd occasion it happens.

So I guess a bike is basically a bike. Given advances in materials have made modern bikes a lot lighter but still just 2 wheels, a frame, chain, crank, gears and ball bearings. I suspect that except for the weight, properly tuned and wearing decent high pressure tires, these old bikes are better than most people realise.

Ken's comment about racing reminded me, my best result in a criterium so far was on a bike with 27" wheels and downtube friction shifters .The course was close enough to flat and didn't have any tight corners so there was virtually no shifting required and the extra weight of the bike actually helped to maintain momentum.

When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.

Who is online

About the Australian Cycling Forums

The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.